Cognitive Health After Cerebellar Stroke: Potential Link Between Socio-Educational Status and Memory Outcome
Bibliographic record
Abstract
While deficits in episodic memory have been noted following cerebellar damage, there is a lack of research systematically exploring the socio-demographic and cognitive profiles of patients with such impairments. This study aimed to differentiate between chronic-phase cerebellar stroke patients with and without verbal episodic memory deficits, and to determine whether those with deficits exhibit distinct socio-demographic and clinical profiles, thereby identifying potential factors associated with these impairments. Data from 15 cerebellar stroke patients in the CEREBEMO cohort were analyzed, with participants categorized into two groups based on verbal episodic memory performance: deficits (n = 8) and no deficits (n = 7). Statistical analyses, including Generalized Linear Mixed Models and Chi-Squared tests, compared socio-demographic and neuropsychological variables between the groups. Significant differences were observed in socio-educational levels, with a higher proportion of patients with memory deficits at intermediate education levels. Moreover, patients with memory deficits performed worse on the Montreal Cognitive Assessment and the Trail Making Test, indicating overall lower cognitive efficiency and slower processing speed. Post-hoc analysis showed that, despite the limited sample size, our sample effectively detected a significant difference between the two groups with high statistical power. These findings highlight potential socio-educational and cognitive factors associated with memory impairments following cerebellar stroke.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".